results for the fourth quarter ended 31 december 2009...this presentation is focused on comparing...

0

0

Results for the Fourth Quarter ended 31 December 2009

21 January 2010

1

1

Disclaimer

This Presentation is focused on comparing results for the three months ended 31 December 2009 versus results achieved in the three months ended 31 December 2008 and versus results achieved in the previous quarter ended 30 September 2009. This shall be read in conjunction with Mapletree Logistics Trust’s financial results for the three months ended 31 December 2009 in the SGXNET announcement.

This release may contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Actual future performance, outcomes and results may differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements as a result of a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Representative examples of these factors include (without limitation) general industry and economic conditions, interest rate trends, cost of capital and capital availability, competition from similar developments, shifts in expected levels of property rental income, changes in operating expenses, including employee wages, benefits and training, property expenses and governmental and public policy changes and the continued availability of financing in the amounts and the terms necessary to support future business. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward looking statements, which are based on current view of management on future events.

2

2

Agenda

� Key highlights

� Capital management

� Resilient portfolio

� Outlook

� Summary

� Appendix

3

3

Key highlights

4

4

� Steady FY 2009 and 4Q 2009 results � Amount Distributable rises by 21% in FY 2009

� Improvement in full year results on the back of 12% increase in net property income (“NPI”) and one-time gain on extension of lease of an existing property.

� 4Q 2009 DPU of 1.59 cents is 7% higher that 3Q 2009

� Excluding one-time effect of Prima1, DPU is 1.48 cents which is similar to 3Q 2009 DPU and vs 1.46 cents in 4Q 2008

� Stable tenant base ensures portfolio resilience � Sustained high portfolio occupancy above 98%

� Tenant retention improves to around 80%

� High quality tenancies, long leases and strong leasing covenants (e.g. ample security deposits, rental escalations, etc.)

� Diversified tenant base

1: This is a one-time consideration from Prima to extend the leases and licenses with Prima at 201 Keppel Road by 8 years. Please see SGXNET announcement on this dated 31 December 2009

Key Highlights

5

5

Key highlights (cont’d)

� No balance sheet risk� Aggregate leverage as at 31 December 2009 is below 40% and lower than

our medium-term range of 40%-45%

� Strong interest cover ratio of about 5.0x

� Unsecured debt funding provides MapletreeLog with significant financial flexibility

� “Yield + Growth” strategy intact

� Focus on yield optimisation and balance sheet preservation

� Actively building acquisition pipelines in Singapore and rest of Asia

� Fund raising – balancing equity & debt mix for acquisitions

6

6

� Strong and committed Sponsor

� Continues to incubate development pipelines

� Approximately S$300 million of Sponsor’s development pipeline completed or nearing completion

� The Manager is committed to maintain 100% distribution payout

Key highlights (cont’d)

7

7

IN S$ THOUSANDS 4Q 2009 3Q 2009 Variance

GROSS REVENUE 50,785 50,767 0.0%

PROPERTY EXPENSES 5,844 6,707 -12.9%

NET PROPERTY INCOME 44,941 44,060 2.0%

AMOUNT DISTRIBUTABLE 31,826 28,793 10.5%

AVAILABLE DPU (CENTS) 1.59 1.48 7.4%

PROPERTY EXPENSES /

GROSS REVENUE11.5% 13.2% -1.7%

NPI / GROSS REVENUE 88.5% 86.8% 1.7%

AMOUNT DISTRIBUTABLE /

GROSS REVENUE62.7% 56.7% 6.0%

Statement of total return – 4Q 2009 vs 3Q 2009Q-o-Q

8

8

Statement of total return – FY 2009 vs FY 2008

IN S$ THOUSANDS FY 2009 FY 2008 Variance

GROSS REVENUE 206,786 184,922 11.8%

PROPERTY EXPENSES 25,949 23,929 8.4%



AVAILABLE DPU (CENTS) 6.02 7.24 -16.9%

PROPERTY EXPENSES /





9

9

Scorecard since IPO (Amount Distributable)

1: Period for 3Q05 is from 28 July 2005 (Listing Date) to 30 September 20052: Decline in portfolio asset value is due to currency movements3: There was a one-time consideration from Prima Limited to extend the leases and licenses with them at 201 Keppel Road by 8 years. For details, please see SGXNET announcement dated 31 December 2009. Excluding this, amount distributable is S$29.5 million.

3

Asset Value

(S$)$422m $462m $715m $1.0b $1.1b $1.4b $1.5b $2.1b $2.4b $2.4b $2.5b $2.5b $2.7b $2.9b $3.0b $2.9b $2.9b $2.9b

Lettable Area

(mil sqm)0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2

4958

828181

4136

2824

8181

1815

79

72

6170

76

28.6 28.7 28.8

31.7

28.3

19.1

15.3

9.68.3

6.0

22.621.019.7

17.7

11.810.7

25.4

4.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

3Q05 4Q05 1Q06 2Q06 3Q06 4Q06 1Q07 2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3Q09 4Q09

Nu

mb

er

of

pro

pe

rtie

s

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

15.0

18.0

21.0

24.0

27.0

30.0

33.0

Am

ou

nt D

istrib

uta

ble

(S$

m)

1

CAGR = 60%

FY06 Amt Dist = S$40.4m FY07 Amt Dist = S$71.8m FY08 Amt Dist = S$97.4m

2

FY09 Amt Dist = S$117.9m

10

10

Asset Value

(S$)$422m $462m $715m $1.0b $1.1b $1.4b $1.5b $2.1b $2.4b $2.4b $2.5b $2.5b $2.7b $2.9b $3.0b $2.9b $2.9b $2.9b

Lettable Area

(mil sqm)0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2

1824

82

5849

413628

818176

7061

7279

15

81 81

0.80

1.051.10

1.19

1.32

1.45 1.481.59

1.721.78

1.902.04

1.84

1.46 1.47 1.481.59

1.48

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

3Q05 4Q05 1Q06 2Q06 3Q06 4Q06 1Q07 2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3Q09 4Q09

Nu

mb

er

of

pro

pe

rtie

s

0.50

0.70

0.90

1.10

1.30

1.50

1.70

1.90

2.10

Ac

tua

l DP

U (c

en

ts)

1

2

3

CAGR = 18%

FY06 DPU = 5.06 cents FY07 DPU = 6.57 cents FY08 DPU = 7.24 cents FY09 DPU = 6.02 cents

Scorecard since IPO (DPU)

1: Period for 3Q05 is from 28 July 2005 (Listing Date) to 30 September 20052: Drop in DPU in 4Q08 is due to increase in number of units following the rights issue in August 2008 which increased the number of units from 1,108 million to 1,939 million3: Decline in portfolio asset value is due to currency movements4: There was a one-time consideration from Prima to extend the leases and licenses with them at 201 Keppel Road by 8 years. For details, please see SGXNET announcement dated 31 December 2009. Excluding this, DPU is 1.48 cents.

4

11

11

7.7%

2.6%

1.5%

0.5%

2.5%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

MapletreeLog FY

2009 Yield

10-Year Singapore

Government Bond

5-Year Singapore

Government Bond

Bank 12-month Fixed

Deposit Rate

CPF Ordinary

Account

Yie

ld %

1

2

2

3

4

Attractive yield vs other investments

1: Based on MapletreeLog's closing price of 78.5 cents unit as at 20 Jan 2010 and actual FY 09 DPU of 6.02 cents. 2: Bloomberg3: Average S$ 12-month fixed deposit savings rate as at 20 Jan 20104: Prevailing CPF Ordinary Account interest rate5: Based on MapletreeLog's closing price of [S$0.78] per unit as at 20 Jan 2010 and NAV per unit of S$0.85 as at 31

Dec 2009

Trading at 8% discount to NAV 5

4.8% yield spread over 10-Year Bond

12

12

Capital management

13

13

Balance Sheet 30 Sep 2009

S$’000

31 Dec 2009

S$’000

Total assets 3,034,927 3,000,194

Including

Investment Properties 2,896,273 2,933,250

Revaluation Gains - (16,539)

Total liabilities 1,330,930 1 1,246,845 2

Net assets attributable to unitholders 1,703,997 1,753,349

NAV per Unit S$0.88 3 S$0.85 4

Financial Ratio

Aggregate Leverage Ratio 38.1% 5 36.7%

Total Debt S$1,175 million S$1,093 million

Weighted Average Annualised Interest Rate 6 2.7% 2.6%

Interest Service Ratio 7 4.8 times 4.9 times

Capital management

1: Includes derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$53.9 million.2: Includes derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$46.4 million.3: Includes net derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$50.3 million. Excluding this, the

NAV per unit would be S$0.90.4: Includes net derivative financial instruments, at fair value, liability of S$43.0 million. Excluding this, the

NAV per unit would be S$0.87.5: Excludes S$40 million borrowings ear-marked for re-financing existing borrowings. If we include this, the

leverage ratio would be 38.9%.6: For the quarter ended.7: Ratio of EBITDA over interest expense for period up to balance sheet date.

14

14

80% 80% 78% 76%81%

20% 20% 22% 24%19%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Q4 08 Q1 09 Q2 09 Q3 09 Q4 09

38.5% 39.0%1 38.7%238.9%3 36.7%

Over 80% of total debt is long term

Total Debt4 1.2bn 1.2bn 1.2bn 1.1bn

Long Term

Short Term1: Excluding approximately S$40m cash earmarked for debt-financing - 38.3%2: Excluding approximately S$40m cash earmarked for debt-financing – 37.8%3: Excluding approximately S$40m cash earmarked for debt-financing – 38.1% 4: Actual debt as at quarter-end. Excludes deferred consideration

Gearing

1.2bn

15

15

6% 4%

21%

1%

41%

4%

4%

2%

1%6%

5%

2%2%

1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Maturing in

2009

Maturing in

2010

Maturing in

2011

Maturing in

2012

Maturing in

2013

SGD HKD JPY MYR CNY KRW USD

5%1%5%

2%

1%5%

22%

44%

4%

6%

3%

2%

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Maturing in 2010 Maturing in 2011 Maturing in 2012 Maturing in 2013

SGD HKD JPY MYR CNY KRW USD

Debt Amount

Actual Debt as at 30 September 2009

S$1,093 million

Actual Debt as at 31 December 2009

S$1,135 million

Average Duration= 1.9 years

Average Duration= 2.0 years

S$m S$m

1: Actual Debt as at 30 September 2009; excludes deferred consideration of S$4.4 mil

Proforma

19% or S$204 million of debt due in FY 2010

16

16

Natural hedge our preferred forex hedging policyLocal currency loans set up natural hedge against currency fluctuations

Gearing level – by country (as at 31 December 2009)

11%

98%

42% 45%

82%

100%89%

58% 55%

18%

2%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Equity % 89% 2% 58% 55% 18% 0%

Debt % 11% 98% 42% 45% 82% 100%

Singapore China Hong Kong Malaysia Japan Korea

17

17

Hedging Profile

66% 61%

43%31%

22%

4%

34% 39%

57%69%

78%

96%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

61%46%

32%23%

31%

50%

67%77%

96%

4%

1%

4%

8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

69%

50%33%

Hedged

Floating Rate Weighted average no. of years of hedged rates = 2.12

Interest rate management – overall portfolio (% terms)

New Hedged

1: Actual Debt as at 30 September 2009; excludes deferred consideration of S$4.4 million 2: Actual Debt as at 31 December 2009; excludes deferred consideration of S$8.7 mil

81 Properties as at 30 September 2009

Weighted average no. of years of hedged rates = 2.1 1

82 Properties as at 31 December 2009

18

18

Simulation 1:Impact of any potential increase in base interest rates on average interest cost

Every potential 0.25% increase in base rates1, may result in around 0.08% change in average interest cost

0.31%2.89%+ 1.00%

0.24%2.82%+ 0.75%

0.16%2.74%+ 0.50%

0.08%2.66%+ 0.25%

-2.58%Current

ChangeAverage Interest Cost (all-

in)Change in Base Rate

1: Base rate denotes SGD swap offer rate, USD LIBOR, JPY LIBOR, HIBOR and KLIBOR

19

19

Prudent capital management

� Have sufficient resources to meet all 2010 debt obligations when they become due

� Comfortable gearing ratio – 36.7% in Dec 09, which is lower than our medium-term target range of 40%-45%

� Interest cover ratio maintained at about 5.0x

� Hedges on borrowings increased to approximately 70% in Dec 09

� All loans are unsecured; minimal financial covenants; no CMBS

� Credit rating of Baa2 with stable outlook by Moody’s

20

20

Resilient portfolio

21

21

Resilient portfolio

� Occupancy rate improves to 98.1% in Dec 09 vs 97.1% in Sep 09

� Stable tenant base� Approximately 95% of leases due for renewal in 2009 have been renewed and/or replaced1

�Balance 5% expected to be leased soon

� Tenant retention improves to approximately 80%

�Stability from long leases� Weighted average lease term to expiry (“WALE”) maintained at about 5 years

� Ample cushion from security deposits� Equivalent to 55% of 2009 gross revenue, or average of 6.8 months coverage

1: By gross revenue

22

22

Resilient portfolio (cont’d)

� Arrears ratio steady at around 1% of annualised gross revenue

� Enquiry levels for space improving across countries

� Diversification in terms of geography, tenants and end-users

23

23

� Around 95% of leases1 expiring in 2009 have been renewed/replaced to date (19.6% of overall portfolio revenue)

� Average reversion rate flat2 due to priority in retaining tenants� Balance space left to be renewed/replaced is approx 13,000 sqm (0.6% of portfolio NLA or 1% of portfolio revenue).

� In 2010, around 16% of leases (by gross revenue; 12% by NLA) are up for renewal –these are mostly in Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong

Successful lease renewals in FY 2009

Singapore Hong Kong China Malaysia Total area

% of 2009

renewals

Total renewable for FY 2009 100.5 105.1 33.8 18.1 257.4 100%

(12.1% of total portfolio)

Spaces renewed/replaced to date 95.3 98.7 33.2 17.4 244.6 95%

(11.5% of total portfolio)

5.2 6.4 0.6 0.7 12.8 5%

(0.6% of total portfolio)Spaces to be renewed

1: As % of gross revenue

2: Compared to previous prevailing rentals

Spaces renewed/replaced in FY 2009 (in ’000 sqm)

Spaces up for renewal in FY 2010 (in ’000 sqm)Singapore Malaysia Hong Kong China Total area

Total renewable for FY 2010 82.4 69.3 68.1 43.1 262.9

(12% of portfolio NLA)

24

24

95% 95%

5% 5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

By Gross Revenue By Lettable Area

Renewed to date Balance to be renewed

% r

en

ew

ed

to

date

Successful lease renewals in FY 2009 (cont’d)

25

25

Portfolio value remains steadyRevaluation loss of S$16.5 million or less than 1% in

FY 2009

Breakdown by Countries

1: Drop in market value in Singapore is due to revaluation of 9 Tampines as a light industrial building instead of a datacentre

2: Drop in market value in Japan and South Korea are due to recent comparative transactions in the respective markets

2

2

1

Revaluation gain/loss

(in S$ '000)

Singapore -1,596

Hong Kong 2,245

Japan -17,628

China 2,602

Malaysia 38

South Korea -2,201

Total -16,539

26

26

MapletreeLog’s warehouse space High occupancy levels sustained

Source: Mapletree, URA 3Q09

98.9%

93.4%

100.0%

95.7%

99.6%100.0%

98.1%

88.0%

90.0%

92.0%

94.0%

96.0%

98.0%

100.0%

Singapore Hong

Kong

Japan China Malaysia S. Korea Total

Portfolio

URA Avg: 92%

MLog

81 properties as at

30 Sep 2009

MLog

82 properties as at

31 Dec 2009Weighted Average

Occupancy Rate97.1% 98.1%

27

27

3.9%

3.5%3.3% 3.3%

1.9%

4.7%

2.6%

2.1%2.2%

0.9%

3.3%

1.9%

2.1%2.2%

3.3%3.3%3.5%

1.8%

3.3%

3.0%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

NEC

Logistics

Nichirei

Kyoto

Toshiba

Logistics

Menlo Group TeckWah

Group

SH Cogent

Group

Vopak Asia

Group

Tentat Group Fu Yu

Corporation

Ltd

Hankyu

Hanshin

Holdings

81 properties as at 30 September 2009 82 properties as at 31 December 2009

Fu Yu

235 tenants in portfolio, no single tenant accounts for >5% of total revenue

NEC Logistics

Menlo

Group

TeckWah

Group

Toshiba

Logistics

Hankyu Hanshin Holdings

Nichirei Kyoto

Vopak Asia Group

Tentat

Group

Top 10 tenants by gross revenue

Diversified tenant mix provides portfolio stability

Top 10 tenants account for approx 29% of total gross revenue

Multinational logistics operators

Singapore listed groups

Private groups

SH Cogent

Group

28

28

Non-FTZ 3PL

51.7%

Distribution

Centre

21.0%

Oil &

Chemical

Logistics

3.1%

Industrial

Warehousing

12.6%

Food & Cold

Storage

5.8%

FTZ 3PL

5.8%Non-FTZ 3PL

51.4%

Distribution

Centre

21.0%

FTZ 3PL

5.8%

Food & Cold

Storage

5.9%

Industrial

Warehousing

12.7%

Oil & Chemical

Logistics

3.2%

Professional 3PLs face leasing stickiness

Gross revenue contribution by trade sector(81 properties as at 30 Sep 2009)

Gross revenue contribution by trade sector(82 properties as at 31 Dec 2009)

Total 3PL: 57.2% Total 3PL: 57.5%

29

29

Exposure to stable end-users

Gross revenue contribution by tenant distribution channel1 (as at 31 Dec 2009)

Stable gross revenue contribution by end-user industry (as at 31 Dec 2009)

1: Analysis is for tenants who are 3PLs and distributors

Tenants more reliant on inland and sea channels

Mixture (Air/Sea/Inland)31%

Sea

13%

Inland

43%

Air

13%Utilities & Telecommunication

Services

5%

Electrical & Electronics

6%

Chemicals

1%

F&B

16%

Information Technology

14%

Consumer Durables & staples

20%

Materials, Construction &

Engineering

10%

Commercial Printing

7%

Health Care

7%

Energy & Marine

7%

Industrials

7%

3030

30

Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted buildings(by gross revenue)

Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted

by gross revenue (as at 31 Dec 09)

Single-

tenanted

59%

Multi-

tenanted

41%

31

31

7.5%

12.3%

36.6%

3.4%

16.7%16.7%

8.9%

17.9%

12.6%

36.6%

3.3%

15.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Expiring in

2010

Expiring in

2011

Expiring in

2012

Expiring in

2013

Expiring in

2014

Expiring after

2014


Long leases provide rental baseloadWeighted average lease term to expiry: ~5 years

Lease Expiry Profile by Gross Revenue

1

1: Noted that figures above the orange bars add up to 95%. The balance 5% relates to leases that were up for renewal in 2009 that have not yet been renewed.

32

32

4.4%

3.2%

9.9%

17.0%

6.2%

2.0%

2.1%

0.6%

0.5%

5.7%

9.2%

0.5%

0.1%

7.5%

1.6%

0.7%

2.8%

0.2%

1.1% 1.3%

1.3%

2.2%

14.7%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 >2014

15.7% 17.9% 8.9% 3.3% 12.6% 36.6%

Lease expiry by year (entire portfolio)

As

% o

f to

tal

po

rtfo

lio

re

ve

nu

e

Singapore Hong Kong China Malaysia Japan S. Korea

Bulk of leases expiring only beyond 2014

Lease Expiry Profile by Gross Revenue (by country)

1

1: Noted that figures above the orange bars add up to 95%. The balance 5% relates to leases that were up for renewal in 2009 that have not yet been renewed.

33

33

7.2%

0.9%

11.4%

7.1%

12.2%

0.9%

9.7%

27.8%

42.1%

26.7%

41.3%

12.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0 - 20 yrs 21 - 30 yrs 31 - 40 yrs 41 - 50 yrs 51 - 60 yrs > 60 yrs

% o

f T

ota

l L

ett

ab

le A

rea


Long land leases provide stability to the portfolioWeighted average of unexpired lease term of underlying land: approx 153 yrs1

1: For computation purposes, freehold properties are assigned a lease term of 999 years

Remaining Years to Expiry of Underlying Land Lease

34

34

Outlook

35

35

MapletreeLog’s strategy for 2010

“Yield + Growth” strategy intact - focusing on yield preservation and looking for growth via accretive acquisitions1

� Completed acquisition of 7 Penjuru Close for S$43 million in Dec 2009

� Announced acquisition of 9th Japan property for S$68 million in Dec 2009

� Actively building a pipeline of accretive third party acquisition opportunities

� More realistic price expectations from vendors

� Strong, experienced team with proven track record

� No compromise on our rigorous asset selection criteria

� Sponsor continues to lease / construct the development pipelines earmarked for MapletreeLog

� Fund raising – balancing equity & debt mix for acquisitions

� Undertake BTS opportunities within MapletreeLog

Challenging but improving environment �� some easing of pressure on warehousing rentals and occupancyResponse �� Yield protection & tenant retention are our key priorities

�� Growth via accretive acquisitions

36

36

MapletreeLog’s strategy for 2010Challenging but improving environment �� some easing of pressure on warehousing rentals and occupancyResponse �� Yield protection & tenant retention are our key priorities

�� Look for growth via accretive acquisitions

Optimise yield from existing portfolio2

� Active leasing and marketing, tenant retention and asset management to preserve cash flows and manage expenses

� Focus on maintaining portfolio occupancy

� Sustainable long term gearing levels

� No refinancing risks

� Active hedging and terming out to manage debt and currency profile

� Less predictable approach to fund raising

3 Proactive capital management strategy

37

37

Outlook for 2010 – improving but still challenging

Execution

� Resilient cash flows –full effect of recently announced acquisitions to improve topline

� Tenant stickiness, high renewal rates sustained ~80% in 4Q 091

� Stable rentals: 59% from single-tenanted buildings with built-in rental escalations

� High occupancy rate: >98% as at Dec 2009

� Some organic growth: 1.2% in Dec 20092

Action plan

Growing top line

Managing property expenses

� Triple net covenants: 51% of lettable area

� Non-inflationary macro-environment; CPI Inflation forecast: 2.5% to 3.5% in 20103

� Known property costs: 76% of property related expenses fixed

1

2

Managing other expenses

3

1: In terms of gross revenue2: Growth is for the assets in the portfolio at the beginning of Jan 083: MAS Survey of Professional Forecasters, Dec 2009; Bloomberg

� Benign interest rate environment: 2.6% interest cost at Dec 2009

� 69% hedged as at Dec 2009

� Adequate debt financing facilities

38

38

Summary

3939

39

In Summary

� Resilient portfolio will continue to provide stability to revenue & DPU

� Continue to focus on yield optimisation and maintaining occupancy

� Recently announced acquisitions to add to revenue and DPU in 2010

� Explore accretive acquisitions� Experienced team with proven track record � Maintain rigorous asset selection criteria� Acquisitions will be funded by a mixture of debt and equity to

maintain acceptable leverage ratio� No EFR for recapitalisation purposes

40

40

Strength in adversity

� Amount distributable:� S$118 million in FY 2009; 21% higher than in FY 2008� S$32 million in 4Q 2009; 12% higher than in 4Q 2008

� 4Q 2009 DPU is 7% higher than 3Q 2009 DPU �� 1.59 cents

� Expect NPI and amount distributable in FY 2010 to be better than FY 2009

41

41

Recap

IN S$ THOUSANDS FY 2009 FY 2008 Variance

GROSS REVENUE 206,786 184,922 11.8%

PROPERTY EXPENSES 25,949 23,929 8.4%



AVAILABLE DPU (CENTS) 6.02 7.24 -16.9%

PROPERTY EXPENSES /





42

42

Thank you

43

43

Appendix

4444

44

Distribution details

1.594Q 2009MapletreeLog

Distribution per unit(S$ Cents)

Distribution PeriodCounter Name

Distribution Time Table

Notice of book closure date 21 January 2010

Last day of trading on “cum” basis 26 January 2010, 5:00pm

Ex-date 27 January 2010, 9:00am

Books closure date 29 January 2010, 5:00pm

Distribution payment date 26 February 2010

Note: 17th distribution for the period from 1 January 2009 to 17 November 2009 (already paid on 24 December 2009) and 18th distribution for the period from 18 November 2009 to 31 December 2009.

45

45

Geographical DiversificationCountry Allocation - By NPI – FY 2008 vs FY 2009

Note: FY 2008 started with 70 properties and ended with 81 properties. FY 2009 started with 81 properties and ended with 82 properties.

South South South South KoreaKoreaKoreaKorea

1%1%1%1%JapanJapanJapanJapan15%15%15%15%

ChinaChinaChinaChina7%7%7%7%

MalaysiaMalaysiaMalaysiaMalaysia5%5%5%5%

Hong Hong Hong Hong KongKongKongKong22%22%22%22%

SingaporeSingaporeSingaporeSingapore50%50%50%50%

FY 2009





Hong Hong Hong Hong KongKongKongKong24%24%24%24%


FY 2008

46

46

Geographical Diversification

Country Allocation - By NPI – 3Q 2009 vs 4Q 2009

Note : 4Q 2009 started with 81 properties and ended with 82 properties. 3Q 2009 started and ended with 81 properties.

South

Korea

1%

Japan

16%

China

8%

Malaysia

5%

Hong

Kong

22%

Singapore

48%

3Q 2009





Hong KongHong KongHong KongHong Kong21%21%21%21%


4Q 2009

4747

47

Country split of MTB

Singapore

43%

Hong Kong

43%

China

13%

Malaysia

1%

Country split of SUA

Singapore

60%

China

2%

Hong Kong

2%

Japan

27%

Malaysia

8%

S. Korea

1%

Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted buildings(by gross revenue)

1

1: SUA refers to single user assets; MTB refers to multi-tenanted buildings

1

Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted

by gross revenue (as at 31 Dec 09)

Single-

tenanted

59%

Multi-

tenanted

41%

4848

48

Single-tenanted vs multi-tenanted buildings(by no. of assets and NLA)

By no. of assets By NLA

Note: As at 31 Dec 09

Multi-

tenanted,

16

Single-

tenanted,

66

Single-

tenanted,

48%

Multi-

tenanted,

52%

49

49

Singapore warehouse oversupply exaggerated

� Over 69% of upcoming supply in Singapore has already been pre-leased or is being built by end-users �� balance amount (191k sqm) is not a big threat

� No new spaces coming up in Hong Kong in the next 2 years

Source: URA 3Q 09, Mapletree estimates

Upcoming supply of warehouses in SingaporeUpcoming supply of warehouses in Singapore vs existing Stock

Competitive

Supply

3%

Existing

Stock

97%

6,785k sqm

191k sqm

Total Stock

6,976k sqm

Competitive

Supply

31%

Taken up by

End Users /

Pre-Leased

69%

191k sqm

425k sqm

Total: 616k sqm over the next 3 yrs

50

50

Singapore warehouse occupancy trend

Source : URA 3Q09

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000Q1 94

Q3 94

Q1 95

Q3 95

Q1 96

Q3 96

Q1 97

Q3 97

Q1 98

Q3 98

Q1 99

Q3 99

Q1 00

Q3 00

Q1 01

Q3 01

Q1 02

Q3 02

Q1 03

Q3 03

Q1 04

Q3 04

Q1 05

Q3 05

Q1 06

Q3 06

Q1 07

Q3 07

Q1 08

Q3 08

Q1 09

Q3 09

('0

00

sq

m)

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

Oc

cu

pa

nc

y

Existing Stock Upcoming Supply Occupancy

Asian Financial Crisis,

Jul 97 SARS,

Nov 02Dot Com Burst,

Mar 00

Current Financial Crisis, Jul 07

Bali Bombing, Oct

05

91.8%

51

51

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

199

8Q

4

199

9Q

2

199

9Q

4

200

0Q

2

200

0Q

4

200

1Q

2

200

1Q

4

200

2Q

2

200

2Q

4

200

3Q

2

200

3Q

4

200

4Q

2

200

4Q

4

200

5Q

2

200

5Q

4

200

6Q

2

200

6Q

4

200

7Q

2

200

7Q

4

200

8Q

2

200

8Q

4

200

9Q

2

S$ P

SM

Multiple User Warehouse (Average) Office (Average) Retail (Average)

Capital values peaked:

2Q 2008 (office, retail)

3Q 2008 (warehouse)

Capital values hit bottom:

2Q 2004 (warehouse, office)

3Q 2008 (retail)

Warehouse sector is less volatile

Source: URA 3Q09, Singapore; Median Price & Rental of Multiple-user Warehouse

Capital values Rental values

Capital Retail Office Warehouse

Avd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Avd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Avd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Trough to Peak 9% 17 9% 17 8% 16

Rental Retail Office Warehouse

Avd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Avd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Avd p.a.

ChgQtrs

Trough to Peak 10% 17 37% 17 11% 16

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

19

98

Q4

19

99

Q2

19

99

Q4

20

00

Q2

20

00

Q4

20

01

Q2

20

01

Q4

20

02

Q2

20

02

Q4

20

03

Q2

20

03

Q4

20

04

Q2

20

04

Q4

20

05

Q2

20

05

Q4

20

06

Q2

20

06

Q4

20

07

Q2

20

07

Q4

20

08

Q2

20

08

Q4

20

09

Q2

S$

PS

M p

er

mth

Multiple User Warehouse (Average) Office (Average) Retail (Average)

Rentals peaked: 2Q 2008Rentals hit bottom: 1Q 2004

52

52

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

199

1

199

2

199

3

199

4

199

5

199

6

199

7

199

8

199

9

200

0

200

1

200

2

200

3

200

4

200

5

200

6

200

7

200

8

200

9

20

10

F

20

11

F

20

12

F

('0

00

sq

ft)

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

Oc

cu

pa

nc

y

Warehouse Supply Occupancy

Hand over of HK, Jul 97

Asian Financial Crisis, Jul 97

HK Influenza, Dec 97

Dot Com Burst, Mar 00

SARS, Nov 02

Bali Bombing, Oct 05

Current Financial Crisis, Jul 07

Lack of new supply in HK is supportive to revenues

Source : Savills Research and Consultancy (HK), Jul 09; Mapletree estimates1: New World development located at Kwai Chung Container Port2: Goodman development located at Tsing Yi

No New Supply

1

2

53

53

Steady increase in Asia’s share of the global logistics market

Source: Datamonitor, December 2008

183 199 220 243 272 291 318 350387

432

42%

40%

38%

36%

35%

34%

32%

31%

30%

29%

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008F 2009F 2010F 2011F 2012F

Lo

gis

tic

s M

ark

et

Va

lue

US

$ b

illi

on

25%

27%

29%

31%

33%

35%

37%

39%

41%

43%

Sh

are

of

As

ia-P

ac

ific

in

glo

ba

l lo

gis

tic

s

Asia-Pacific Rest of the World Asia-Pacific as % of Global Logistics

54

54

…due to higher growth compared to the rest of the world

Source: Datamonitor, December 2008

Asia-Pacific Logistics Market

432

272

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2007 2012F

Lo

gis

tic

s M

ark

et

Va

lue U

S$

bil

lio

n

CAGR = 9.7%

Rest of the World Logistics Market

609

532

2007 2012F

CAGR = 5.3%

55

55

No Country Project nameGFA (sqm)

Status

1 ChinaMapletree Yangshan Bonded Logistics Park (Shanghai)

46,000 Completed/leasing

2 China Mapletree Wuxi Logistics Park (Wuxi) 45,400 Completed/leasing

3 ChinaMapletree Beijing EPZ Airport Logistics Park (Beijing)

41,100 Under Planning

4 ChinaMapletree Tianjin Airport Logistics Park (Tianjin)

63,400To be completed 3Q 2010

5 ChinaMapletree Tianjin Port HaiFeng Bonded Logistics Park (Tianjin)

191,000 Completed / leasing

Subtotal China 386,900

6 MalaysiaMapletree Shah Alam Logistics Park (Shah Alam)

60,000 Completed/leasing

Subtotal Malaysia 60,000

7 Vietnam Mapletree Logistics Centre (Binh Duong) 23,600 Completed / fully leased

8 Vietnam Mapletree Logistics Park (Binh Duong) 442,000Phases 1 & 2 to be completed end 1Q 2010 / leasing

9 VietnamMapletree Bac Ninh Logistics Park (Bac Ninh)

320,000 Under planning

Subtotal Vietnam 785,600

Total 1,232,500

MIPL’s commitment in development projectsApproximately S$300m completed or nearing completion

56

56

Important notice

The information contained in this presentation is for information purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or any solicitation of an offer or invitation to purchase or subscribe for units in Mapletree Logistics Trust (“MLog”, and units in MLog, “Units”) in Singapore or any other jurisdiction, nor should it or any part of it form the basis of, or be relied upon in any connection with, any contract or commitment whatsoever.

The past performance of the Units and Mapletree Logistics Trust Management Ltd. (the “Manager”) is not indicative of the future performance of MLog and the Manager. Predictions, projections or forecasts of the economy or economic trends of the markets which are targeted by MLog are not necessarily indicative of the future or likely performance of MLog.

The value of units in MLog (“Units”) and the income from them may fall as well as rise. Units are not obligations of, deposits in, or guaranteed by, the Manager or any of its affiliates. An investment in Units is subject to investment risks, including the possible loss of the principal amount invested. Investors have no right to request the Manager to redeem their Units while the Units are listed. It is intended that Unitholders may only deal in their Units through trading on the SGX-ST. Listing of the Units on the SGX-ST does not guarantee a liquid market for the Units. The past performance of MLog is not necessarily indicative of its future performance.

57

57

Thank you

results for the fourth quarter ended 31 december 2009...this presentation is focused on comparing...

Documents